the online appeal of the physical shop: how a physical ...show, among other outcomes, that consumers...

The online appeal of thephysical shop: How a physicalstore can benefit from a virtualrepresentation

Anne Moes *, Harry van Vliet

Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS/HvA), Rhijnspoorplein 1, 1091 GC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

*Corresponding author.

E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Moes).

Abstract

Consumer behaviour in 2016 shows that (r)etailers need online/offline integration

to better serve their clients. An important distinguishing feature of the physical

shop is how it can offer consumers a shopping experience. This study uses two

experiments to research the extent a fashion store’s shopping experience can be

presented to consumers via visual material (a regular photo, a 360-degree photo

and a virtual reality photo of the shop) without the consumers being in the shop

itself. The effects of these visual materials will also be measured in (among others)

terms of purchase intention, visiting intention to the physical shop and online visit

satisfaction. A theoretical framework is used to substantiate how the three types of

pictures can be classified in terms of medium richness. The completed experiments

show, among other outcomes, that consumers who saw the virtual reality photo of

the shop have a more positive shopping experience, a higher purchase intention, a

higher intention to visit the physical shop and more online visit satisfaction than

people who have only seen the regular photo or the 360-degree photo of the shop.

Enjoyment and novelty seem to partly explain these found effects.

Keywords: Computer science, Psychology

Received:17 January 2017

Revised:22 May 2017

Accepted:20 June 2017

Cite as: Anne Moes,Harry van Vliet. The onlineappeal of the physical shop:How a physical store canbenefit from a virtualrepresentation.Heliyon 3 (2017) e00336.doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00336

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00336

2405-8440/© 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

mailto:[email protected]



http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00336&domain=pdf


1. Introduction

While consumers naturally integrate online and offline shopping, retailers are still

exploring the possibilities of optimal integration. The customer journey no longer

follows only one channel. For example, when looking for a new product, 80% of

Dutch consumers first orient themselves online before buying the product in a

physical shop (ROPO research online, purchase offline). This percentage is even

higher (DigitasLBI, 2014) in countries such as United States (89%), United

Kingdom (90%) and China (92%). The opposite also occurs: consumers orient

themselves in the physical shop before making the final purchase online. Sixty per

cent of Dutch consumers do this so-called showrooming. This percentage is also

higher in other countries. In United States 66% engage in showrooming, in United

Kingdom 70% and in China 84% (DigitasLBI, 2014). Also, an increasing number

of consumers are using their smartphones while shopping at physical outlets. For

example, they look online for additional product information and pricing, or they

make photos of the product to share with friends and family before even making

the purchase (DigitasLBI, 2014).

While most retailers still seem to be searching for how to best integrate online and

offline shopping, many examples already exist of retailers trying to optimise this

integration. The shop chain Hema, for example, has developed a mobile

application that allows consumers to check the inventory of different outlets

(Fashionretailfuture, 2014). The warehouse Bijenkorf has experimented with,

among other things, beacons as a way to bring online and offline together. Their

goal was to offer clients more personal service in the physical stores by making

client and purchasing information visible to the sales clerk whenever a client came

into proximity to a beacon. Beacons can also be used in other ways, such as with

the sending of push messages to attract passers-by into the store (Moes and Van

Vliet, 2015). For example, these push messages can include a rebate coupon.

According to research, a quarter of Dutch consumers would be happy to receive

such digital coupons while shopping (TNS, 2013).

In addition to the existing technologies that bring the ease of online shopping to the

physical shop, other technologies are being developed for e-tailers to translate the

advantages of physical shops to the online world. For example, the social aspects of

shopping can be brought online through enabling chatting with other social shoppers

(e.g. Zebo.com). Methods also exist that allows one to experience a fabric online.

Videos can show how a fabric falls when someone wears it and tests are underway

that will allow consumers to experience for themselves how a fabric feels based on

vibrations on a tablet screen (Lu, 2014). Online fitting is also in development − for

example, through personalised avatars (e.g. iFashion) and smart fitting mirrors.

It is becoming increasingly clear that online and offline need each other in order to

provide the best possible service for clients. For this reason, not only are many

Article No~e00336

2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00336




physical locations opening or renewing their website and/or webshop, but also

many ‘pure players’ (players who serve clients only through online channels) are

now opening physical outlets (Store of the Future, 2016). Pure players make this

choice for the same reasons that traditional retailers begin an online channel: to

meet the needs and wishes of the client. The advantages of webshops (such as

extended opening hours, accessibility, worldwide reach) are different than the

advantages of physical shops (personal contact, option to take products home

immediately, trying out products) (Van Vliet et al., 2015). Consumers want to

choose from a broad selection and shop whenever it suits them. Via online

channels, a (r) etailer can usually respond to these requirements. On the other hand,

consumers also want good service, the possibility to directly experience the

product, to build up trust with a certain shop or brand, to pick up their products, to

be able to take home the product immediately after buying it and to have an

experience. Pure players cannot always fulfil these consumer needs with their

online channels, and therefore see added value in opening a physical location. A

physical location does not necessarily have to be a shop − a pick-up point or a

showroom can serve a similar function (Store of the Future, 2016).

When compared to websites and webshops, a physical store seems to have the

advantage of being able to offer consumers a shopping experience (Store of the

Future, 2016). However, experiments have not yet been done with transferring this

experience to the online world. Meanwhile, (r) etailers are already generally

recommended to match their online house style with the atmosphere of the shop

(Kloet, 2012), and to put a photo of the physical shop online (Bakker, 2014) − but

that’s usually the extent of such efforts. To truly integrate online with offline, it couldbe very interesting to communicate the physical shopping experience to the online

consumer − and in this way perhaps bring advantages to both the retailer and the

etailer. For the retailer, this online communication of the shopping experience may

lure more visitors to the physical shop. Conversely, for the etailer, consumers might

experience their online visit better after having experienced the physical shop.

This study researches the level that the shopping experience of a fashion shop can

be brought over to the consumer via visual material, without the consumer actually

being in the shop. In addition, other outcomes will be measured, including visitor

intention and online visit satisfaction.

The study focuses on the effects of the online viewing1 of a photo, a 360-degree

photo and a virtual reality photo of a physical shop. The effects listed here have

1Virtual reality does not necessarily have to take place online. The virtual reality app also works without being

connected to the internet. In this case it is about presenting a shopping experience in another setting than the shop

itself, such as in the consumer’s home. The word ‘online’ is chosen because clients get their instruction to look at the

photo while online, namely via the shop’s website. In fact, for the other two conditions, an internet connection is

required.

Article No~e00336





never been investigated within a fashion retail setting − even though such efforts

can provide interesting insights for both retailers and etailers. It is important to

empirically test what effects new technologies have in retail settings. As the study

of Moes and Van Vliet (2015) concerning the effects of beacons shows, new

technologies do not necessarily evoke desirable consumer attitudes, intentions or

behaviour. In fact, implementation of new technologies can backfire and lead to

negative consequences, even when they were assumed to add value to the retail

sector. To distinguish technology hypes that do little good to retailers and

consumers from possible real retail solutions, empirical research is necessary. The

research question is:

To what extent can a shopping experience be created by means of online material

(regular photo of the store, 360-degree photo or virtual reality photo), and to what

extent do these different materials create different effects relevant for the online

and physical store?

2. Background

2.1. Experience

Shopping experience, as a concept, is receiving increasing attention in recent years.

Retail experts such as Cor Molenaar have shown that stores should focus more on

offering an experience (Retaildetail, 2014); sites such as Shopper Marketing

(2014), Nu.nl (2015) and Retailnews (2013) discuss the subject regularly and

scientific research into shopping experience is regularly undertaken (e.g. Yüksel,

2007; Allard et al., 2009; Bodhani, 2012; Van Vliet, 2014; Moes and Van Vliet,

2015). Experience is defined unambiguously in the literature. However, as an

abstract concept, it can be defined in different ways, and therefore also measured in

different ways (e.g. Bagdare and Jain, 2013). This study follows the interpretation

of shopping experience as an holistic experience of the consumer and researches

the extent that a consumer can have a shopping experience without being in the

shop. For this reason, we chose to operationalize the experience by looking at: 1)

extent of immersion, 2) extent of connection with the shop, 3) extent the visit is

considered memorable, and 4) experienced atmosphere. These four elements are

derived from research by Petermans et al. (2013) and Schmidt-Subramanian

(2013). Petermans et al named twenty characteristics of client experience based on

research of existing literature. The characteristics ‘immersion’, ‘connectedness’and ‘memorableness’ are particularly interesting for this study. Since these three

characteristics are about the consumer’s total, holistic shopping experience rather

than just one aspect of the shopping experience.

Schmidt-Subramanian (2013) substantiates that a customer’s experience consists ofthree layers: the level of enjoyment, the level of ease and the level that one’s needsare met. In turn, each of these layers are, depending on the context, made up of

Article No~e00336





more concrete items. The item ‘experienced atmosphere’ has been added in this

study to the operationalization of experience, since this item also relates to the

consumer’s total experience. Other aspects related to experience presented by

Schmidt-Subramanian, such as the level of how much product information is

offered, are less relevant for this study and therefore excluded.

2.2. The physical store online

Some (collection) websites and webshops include descriptive texts or a photo of their

physical shop on their online platform (such as Locals United and Miinto). Google

goes a step further by offering retailers and other companies the possibility to

document their physical shop/company with Streetview technology. In this way,

retailers can show their whole store, in 360-degrees, to consumers online (Google (n.

d.), 2017). Another way to show consumers a physical store in another setting is via

virtual reality (VR). The Crossmedia research group of the Amsterdam University of

Applied Sciences (AUAS) developed an application that allows the byAMFI

Statement Store in Amsterdam to be virtually explored with the aid of Google

Cardboard. While consumers cannot virtually walk anywhere, they can interact with

the virtual reality by looking around− left, right, up and down − and thereby observe

the shop as if they are standing in the middle of it (Riester and Van Vliet, 2015).

It is still unclear whether the level of these three modalities (regular photo, 360-

degree photo and VR photo) can bring across online the physical shopping

experience and whether this would result in any (positive) effects. To formulate

precise predictions, a theoretical framework is required.

3. Theory

This section provides the reader of a theoretical framework by linking the topic of

this paper to the Media Richness Theory.

3.1. Media richness theory

Media Richness Theory (MRT) predicts what communication mediums are

preferred by people in different situations. To make such predictions, the different

communication media are classified by richness. According to MRT, the following

characteristics define whether a medium is rich or poor (Daft and Lengel, 1984):

1. Feedback capacity (speed and directness): According to this theory, a phone is a

richer medium than a letter because it allows people to react to each other more

quickly.

2. Used channel (text, audio, visual): Since more cues can be brought over via

sound and image than, for example, just sound, YouTube is considered richer

than radio.

Article No~e00336





3. Focus (impersonal-personal): According to the theory, richer media are more

personal because they can involve more non-verbal communication. Therefore,

following this logic, a Skype conversation with video is richer than a telephone

conversation.

4. Richness of language (written, spoken, body language): The more the language

relates to the real world, the richer it is. Face-to-face is therefore richer than a

letter. Similarly, text messages have become richer with the rise of emoticons.

MRT was developed in 1984 – before the rise of the World Wide Web and long

before VR started being used to present physical stores. However, the theory’sclassification system can still be used to determine the richness of regular photos,

360-degree photos and VR photos.

1. Feedback capacity: The feedback capacity for an online photo is low. The user

can look at the photo but it will not react or give feedback. The 360-degree

photo only does this slightly more − the user can click on the arrows to look

around the store. But in contrast to the VR photo, it remains 2D. You could say

the VR photo has the highest feedback capacity since the user can interact with

the image in 3D. To look around the store, users do not have to click on arrows

but rather just move their heads. So in this way, the VR photo ‘reacts’ to the

actions of the user.

2. Used channel: All three photos show the same location. Only with the VR photo

does the viewer see the shop in 3D − so in this way the VR photo channel can

be considered richer than the other two photo types.

3. Focus: Since only one user is looking at a photo, none of these cases involve

non-verbal communication between people. However, you could say that with

the 360-degree photo and the VR photo there’s non-verbal communication

between user and photo, since via movement (clicking or looking) there’sinteraction with the shop photo. With the normal photo, this is not the case. In

addition, a VR photo is possibly more personal than a regular or a 360-degree

photo, because a person that looks at a (360-degree) photo also sees the medium

on which the photo is displayed (laptop). When a person looks at the VR photo,

they only see the shop at that moment. They see no medium or photo framing,

whereby the experience can be considered more direct and therefore more

personal.

4. Richness of language: The language of the VR photo is the richest of all three

photos because it has more similarities with the real world than the other two

types of photos.

On the basis of MRT, a rough division can be made between the relative richness

of each medium (see Fig. 1). From poor to rich: 1) an online regular photo, 2) an

Article No~e00336





online 360-degree photo, and 3) a VR photo. This division does not yet say

anything about how these different communication forms may effect the consumer.

Also when following a more recent model to classify a medium’s richness, a VR

photo can still be considered richer than a 360-degree photo, which in turn can be

considered richer than a normal photo. Based on his study of product presentation

technologies (Verhagen et al., 2016), Verhagen (2016) offers different ways to

present products online based on two elements: 1) vividness: the richness of the

sensory experience, and 2) interactivity: a two-way interaction wherein consumers

control the online product presentation and can immediately see the results of their

actions. These two elements are comparable with the four criteria central to MRT.

Verhagen shows, among other things, that based on these two elements, a photo

scores low with both elements, that a virtual mirror on which the product can be

seen in 3D scores high with both elements, and that a 360-degree spin of this

product scores in between. While in this case it is about showing a product and not

a shop, the three modalities cited in Verhagen’s study are still very comparable to

the modalities that are central to this study and can therefore be considered

relevant.

4. Hypothesis

This section will briefly describe what is already known in the literature about the

effects of different types of media. The dependent variables and the hypotheses

will also be formulated.

4.1. Effect of poorer and richer media

Experience of the physical shop: The question is whether a physical shopping

experience can be conveyed to consumers online. Since the virtual reality photo is

the richest medium of the three researched online modalities, it can be assumed that

VR comes closest to resembling the real world. The 360-degree photo is a less rich

medium and, of the three, the regular photo can be considered the poorest medium.

Therefore, it’s predicted that after seeing the virtual reality photo consumers will

have a stronger sense of having experienced the shop, than after seeing the 360-

degree photo. For the same reason, it’s predicted that viewers of the 360-degree

[(Fig._1)TD$FIG]

Fig. 1. Division of 3 types of media in relation to MRT.

Article No~e00336





photo will have a better sense of having experienced the physical shop than those

who viewed the regular photo.

H1: The virtual reality photo will increase the feeling of having experienced the

physical store to a larger extent compared to the 360-degree photo, which, in turn

will increase this feeling to a larger extent than the photo.

Experience: Van Vliet et al. (2012) are some of the very few who have researched

the effect of different media on the receiver’s experience. In their research ‘PublicAnnotation of Cultural Heritage’, they studied, among other things, the level that

the presentation of a story through video (a rich medium) leads to a stronger

experience with museum visitors than when the story is presented through audio or

text (poorer media). They also studied whether the richer medium leads to a more

positive attitude towards the museum, a stronger motivation to visit the museum, a

higher engagement and stronger emotions. Van Vliet et al. (2012) did find a

positive effect on attitude and motivation, but not a significant effect on emotion,

engagement and experience. One explanation they gave for these findings was that

the actual subjects − i.e. the involved objects − did not illicit much emotion,

engagement and experience.

In their study of online product experience, Verhagen et al. (2014) looked at the

level that the online showing of a product via a photo, a 360-degree spin-photo and

a virtual mirror has an influence on local presence: the degree in which someone

has the idea that the online presentation lines up with the real world product. The

study showed that the local presence was highest with the virtual experience,

followed by the 360-degree spin-photo and, finally, was lowest with the regular

photo. By the measure of local presence, the VR photo also rates the highest for

likeability, which in turn is lowest for the regular photo. So also this study found a

positive effect in a medium being richer. The following hypothesis is drawn:

H2: The virtual reality photo will elicit a more positive experience compared to the

360-degree photo, which in turn will elicit a more positive experience than the

regular photo.

Purchase intention: Since consumers cannot touch a product while online, and

therefore cannot experience it in reality, we are prone to base our opinion of a

shop’s ability to deliver a quality product on, among other things, heuristic cues

that are present at the website of the shop (Venkatesh, 1999). Recognisability is

one such heuristic cue. A virtual reality photo depicts a shop more realistically and

therefore offers a greater chance that the shop will be experienced as more

recognisable than with a regular photo or a 360-degree photo. Thereby, according

to Venkatesh, the consumers who saw the shop via VR will likely regard the shop

as more capable and therefore will be more likely tempted to buy something − than

if they saw the shop via a regular photo or a 360-degree photo. The results of the

Article No~e00336





study by Verhagen et al. (2014) indeed show that VR can (indirectly) lead to higher

purchase intention compared to a regular photo or a 360-degree spin photo. While

Verhagen et al. (2014) did not research any direct effect the type of photo may

have on purchase intention, they did show that a greater feeling of local presence

(via likability) leads to a higher purchase intention (Verhagen et al., 2014). Since

virtual reality leads to more local presence than a 360-degree spin photo, which in

turn has more local presence than a regular photo, and since a higher local presence

(indirectly) leads to a higher purchase intention (Verhagen et al., 2014), hypothesis

3 was formulated as:

H3: The virtual reality photo will elicit a higher purchase intention compared to

the 360-degree photo, which in turn will elicit a higher purchase intention than the

regular photo.

Visitor intention: In their study, Verhagen et al. (2014) only focused on the online

world and therefore did not measure visitor intention in regards to the physical

store. Few studies have dealt with this crossover between online and offline. Little

insight exists into the effects an online channel can have on an offline retailer. This

is notable since consumers often use online and offline channels interchangeably

while shopping (DigitasLBI, 2014). It would therefore be interesting for retailers to

know whether more clients will come to their physical shop if they have a richer

picture on their website instead of a poorer one. It’s expected that visitor intention

is highest with a VR photo and lowest with a regular photo, because other

behavioural intentions, such as the purchase intention, also increases with the

richness of a photo (Verhagen et al., 2014).

H4: The virtual reality photo will elicit a higher visitor intention to the physical

store compared to the 360-degree photo, which in turn will elicit a higher visitor

intention than the regular photo.

Grading: It is also interesting to study whether the richness of the photo on a (r)

etailer’s website has an influence on the grade that a consumer gives their online

visit. After all, the rating that people give for their online visit has everything to do

with their level of satisfaction. For (r) etailers, satisfied visitors are very important,

since satisfaction is an important indicator for loyalty, return visits and the like

(Flavian et al., 2006). Since people seem to enjoy VR (Multiscope, 2016), it is

predicted that consumers will grade their online visit higher if they experienced the

shop virtually, than when they saw the shop on a 360-degree or regular photo:

H5: Consumers that see the virtual reality photo, will grade their online visit

higher than consumers who only see the 360-degree photo or the regular photo.

Opinion on the physical shop: Since the presentation of a physical shopping

experience via an online modality is central to this study, we will also study the

level that seeing different online photos of the shop influences the consumer’s

Article No~e00336





opinion of that shop. Viewers can transfer the characteristics of a medium used to

present something to an advertisement or brand (in this case the shop) (spillover

effect) (Bronner and Neijens, 2006). Since consumers generally enjoy virtual

reality (Multiscope, 2016), the spillover principle means that when a VR

experience is experienced positively, consumers will also rate the physical shop

that was central to the VR experience as more positive:

H6: The virtual reality photo will lead to more positively changed opinions about

the presented store than the 360-degree photo or the regular photo will.

Recall: This study will also research the direct effect that the type of photo may

have on recall. One of the claimed strengths of virtual reality is that whatever it

presents is better remembered (Hol, 2016). This statement is supported by research.

For example, Suh and Lee, 2015 studied the level people learn about products that

are virtually observed. It appears that VR increases the consumers’ overall learningabout a product. This study will research whether this conclusion still holds when

it’s about the shop and not the products it offers.

H7: The virtual reality photo will lead to a better recall concerning the presented

store than with the 360-degree photo and the regular photo.

Enjoyment & Novelty: In addition to the direct effects described above, two

possible mediating variables will also be studied. The first is enjoyment. Research

has shown that enjoyment can at least play a mediating role in the relationship

between the giving of information on a webshop and satisfaction (Kim and Lim,

2010). It can also play a role in the relationship between the type of medium and

the opinion of what’s being presented on that medium (Bronner and Neijens,

2006). The second variable to be studied for a mediating role is novelty. Research

has shown that the newness (novelty) of image interactivity technology has a

positive influence on the emotional arousal and pleasure experienced by the

consumer during online shopping (Kim et al., 2007). Therefore, it can be imagined

that a newer form of online presentation of a shop can also lead to more positive

results for the dependent variables covered in this study. Naturally, the newness of

virtual reality can fade. It’s therefore also important to study the extent that novelty

explains any of the positive effects VR may have.

H8: Enjoyment is an influence on the effect a type of photo has on the experience,

purchase intention, visitor intention, grade for online visit, opinion of physical

store, and recall.

H9: Novelty is an influence on the effect a type of photo has on the experience,

purchase intention, visitor intention, grade for online visit, opinion of physical

store and recall.

See Fig. 2 for a conceptual framework of all the hypotheses.

Article No~e00336





5. Methodology

5.1. Design, data collection & sampling

Two experiments were undertaken to answer the research questions. Both have a

between-subjects design. The independent variable is the form of communication.

The dependent variables are physical shop experience, grade, holistic shop

experience, visitor intention, purchase intention, opinion of physical shop, and

recall. In addition, enjoyment is studied as a potential mediator. Novelty is also

studied as a potential mediator, in the second experiment. The image material was

all shot by a professional photographer at the fashion store America Today. All

subjects received an informed consent and gave permission to use the data for

research-purposes. Both experiments were ethically approved before the data-

collection started.

Experiment 1: Experiment 1 used cluster sampling. Classes from the Amsterdam

University of Applied Sciences were asked during class to take part in the

experiment. Teachers of these classes were consulted beforehand. The data was

gathered from 19 to 26 November 2015. The classes were initially chosen

[(Fig._2)TD$FIG]

Fig. 2. Conceptual framework hypotheses. The expectation is that there is a positiveinfluence of media

richness on the following variables: 1) feeling of experienced the physical store, 2) holistic experience,

3) purchase intention, 4) visitor intention, grading online visit, opinions about the store and recall.

Expected is that these positive causal relationships can partially be explained by the variables enjoyment

and novelty.

Article No~e00336





randomly for one of the three conditions, but with later classes a conscious decision

was made when assigning a condition to ensure that each condition had

approximately same number of test subjects (since the classes varied in size).

A total of 154 test subjects took part in the first experiment. Of these, 33.1% were

male (n = 52) and 66.2% were female (n = 102). The youngest participant was age

16 at the time, and the oldest was age 41. The vast majority was between ages 19

and 23 (72.7%).

The photo condition had 54 test subjects, the 360-degree condition had 49 and the

VR condition had 51. The variation in age between the conditions was not

significantly different (Chi-squared = 39.49, p = 0.115). The number of test

subjects who had never heard of America Today before taking part in this study (n

= 5) was also reasonably divided over the conditions (Chi-squared = 4.91, p =

0.86).

Gender was not equally divided over the three conditions. Men were

overrepresented in the photo condition. In the photo condition, the man/woman

ratio was 25/29, in the 360-degree condition this was 15/33, and in the VR

condition this was 12/40 (Chi-squared = 7.35, p = 0.025). Gender did not appear to

have an influence on the studied dependant variables. The fact that gender was not

equally divided over the three conditions appears to not have made a difference

(experience of physical shop: F (1 150) = 2.32, p = 0.102; grade: F (1 151) = 2.21,

p = 0.139; holistic shop experience: F (1, 147) = 3.01, p = 0,085; visitor intention:

F (1, 151) = 0.11, p = 0.737; purchase intention: F (1 151) = 0.38, p = 0.538;

open-recall1: Chi-squared = 0.000, p = 1 000; open-recall2: Chi-squared = 0.267,

p = 0.606; open-recall3: Chi-squared = 0.504, p = 0,777; aided-recall1: Chi-

squared = 2.083, p = 0.721; aided-recall2: Chi-squared = 0.422, p = 0.981; aided-

recall3: Chi-squared = 0.656, p = 0.957; opinion: Chi-squared = 0.971, p = 0.615).

Experiment 2: In experiment 2, a test subject was randomly assigned one of the

conditions. Due to practical considerations, only two conditions were tested instead

of the three. These were the two conditions where the variables differed the least in

experiment 1: 360-degree and VR. The data for the second experiment was

collected from 17 to 24 May 2016, on every workday except Wednesdays. A total

of 112 test subjects took part in experiment 2. Five of these had also participated in

experiment 1 and were therefore excluded from further analyses (N = 107). Of the

107 test subjects, 26.2% were male and 73.8% were female. The youngest

participant was age 17 at that time and the oldest was age 31. The vast majority of

the test subjects were between ages 19 and 24 (80.4%).

The 360-degree condition had 52 participants and the VR condition had 55. The

variation in age between the conditions did not differ significantly (Chi-squared =

11.73, p = 0.550). Also, the number of test subjects who were not familiar with

Article No~e00336





America Today at the time of the research (n = 5) was again reasonably divided

across the conditions (Chi-squared = 0.16, p = 0.694). In contrast to experiment 1,

gender seemed to be equally divided over the conditions (Chi-squared = 0.03, p =

0.863).

5.2. Stimulus material

All stimulus material was based on the shop America Today. For this research, the

store partnered with the Crossmedia research group of the Amsterdam University

of Applied Sciences. America Today sells sporty ‘college’ apparel for men and

women. For each of the three conditions a homepage was made under the name of

America Today. The website’s layout was exactly the same for each condition. The

text describing America Today was also identical for each condition. For the photo

condition, a photo of the shop was placed beside this text. The 360-degree

condition had a 360-degree photo − which the students could navigate with arrows

− accompanying the text. And with the VR condition, the text came accompanied

with a photo of a Google Cardboard. In each condition, a call to action was placed

above the photo (see Appendix A).

5.3. Procedure

In experiment 1, a class was exposed to the condition by turn. The class was told

that they were participating in a study about websites. It was emphasised that it was

important that while viewing the websites, they shouldn’t visit any other websites

or undertake any other activities beyond what they were told to do. They were also

told not to discuss among themselves. With the VR condition, a Google Cardboard

and a smartphone (with the required application pre-installed) were placed beside

them.

The whole class was exposed to the same condition to minimise distraction from

(the activities of) their neighbours. The students were given an instruction page

(see Appendix B) that told them, among other things, to type in the link and to look

at the website of the involved shop. Depending on the condition that the class was

assigned, the students were exposed to the website belonging to one of the three

conditions (see Appendix A). When they were finished with looking at the website

(and the app if applicable), they were sent via a link to a questionnaire that

measured the dependent variables. Only when every student in the involved class

was finished with filling in the questionnaire, a short debriefing took place to

describe the nature of the research.

For experiment 2, the set-up was largely the same, except that test subjects looked

at the content while in a specifically reserved research space. Another difference

was that test subjects were randomly given one of the two conditions: 360-degree

or VR. In contrast to experiment 1, it was timed how long the test subject looked at

Article No~e00336





the content, with a stopwatch marking 30 seconds intervals. After 30 seconds, the

test leader came inside and opened the questionnaire on the device. At that point,

the test subject could no longer return to the content. The experiment took about 5

min per person. Each test subject received a coupon for a cup of coffee worth €2.50as a thank-you for participating.

5.4. Measuring instruments

To measure the level that test subjects felt that they experienced the physical shop

through their online visit, a question was asked on the seven-point Likert scale:

‘With my online visit, I have the feeling that I experienced America Today’sphysical shop’, with 1 as ‘totally disagree’ and 7 as ‘totally agree’.

Holistic shop experience was measured by rating four items on a seven-point

Likert scale, with 1 as ‘totally disagree’ and 7 as ‘totally agree’. The four items

were based on information from articles by Petermans et al. (2013) and Schmidt-

Subramanian (2013). The items were: ‘During my online visit to America Today I

felt immersed in the shop’; ‘During my online visit to America Today I felt

connected to the shop’; ‘This online visit was memorable’; and ‘I experienced the

atmosphere that America Today reflects online as pleasant’. After a factor analysiswith varimax rotation, it became apparent that these four components in fact form

one component. Together, the items accounted for 71.04% of the variance (64.2%

in experiment 2). The Cronsbach’s alpha was 0.86 (0.81 in experiment 2), and

therefore the scale appears trustworthy. The four items were brought together to

form the component ‘holistic shop experience’.

The chance that after their online visit the test subjects would purchase something

at America Today (purchase intention) was measured with a seven-point Likert

scale, with 1 = ‘very small’ and 7 = ‘very large’: ‘Imagine, you are looking for

new clothing. What’s the likelihood that you would buy clothing at America

Today?’

The two items meant to measure visitor intention formed one component. The

items were ‘The likelihood that I would visit America Today’s physical store is

. . . ’ and ‘The likelihood that I would recommend America Today’s physical

store to friends and/or family is . . . ’ (both measured on a seven-point Likert scale

with 1 = ‘very small’ and 7 = ‘very large’). These items were based on the

behavioural intention scale (Cronin et al., 2000). Together the items accounted for

86.61% of the variance (84.70% in experiment 2). Using a Cronbach’s alpha, thescale was rated 0.85 trustworthy (0.82 in experiment 2).

The grade that test subjects gave their online visit was measured via the question:

‘What grade would you give your online visit to America Today?’ (with 1 being

‘very bad’ and 10 being ‘very good’).

Article No~e00336





Test subjects who were already familiar with America Today before taking part in

this study, were asked via multiple-choice about the level their opinion about

America Today was changed by their online visit. The possible answers were: 1)

No change; 2) It did change, with my opinion becoming more positive; 3) It did

change, with my opinion becoming more negative.

Finally, the dependent variables open-recall and aided-recall were measured.

Recall is often measured by testing after a stimulus encounter − of, for example, an

advertisement − to see which details were remembered (e.g. Newell and

Henderson, 1998; Mcelrath, 2005). To measure recall in this study, three open

questions were asked about what the test subjects were exposed to: 1) ‘On the

photo was a sales board with an offered discount. Do you remember what items

were being offered? If yes, fill in the answer below.’ 2) ‘Do you remember how

much the discount was for these items? If yes, fill in the answer below.’ 3) ‘What

was the year that was mentioned in the website text?’. The same three questions

were asked in a multiple-choice format, to measure the aided-recall. The recall

questions were posed at the end of the questionnaire.

The possible mediator ‘enjoyment’ was measured on a seven-point Likert scale,

based on the response to the statement ‘I found my online visit enjoyable’.

In experiment 2, the possible mediator ‘novelty’ was also evaluated. The items are

derived from the PSMV scale and are measured on a seven-point semantic

differential scale: unique-ordinary; innovative-average; unusual-usual. The three

items were made from one component with a stated variance of 72.76%. The

Cronbach’s alpha was 0.81.

Two more supplementary constructs were also involved in experiment 2: whether

the test subjects took part in experiment 1 and the usage. The latter was only

measured with consumers from the VR condition, by asking the following

questions: ‘I would buy a Cardboard for 10 euros so I could virtually look at the

shop’; ‘If I was given a free Cardboard, I would download the free app from a shop

so I could virtually look at this shop’; and ‘If I was given a free Cardboard, I wouldvisit YouTube to virtually look at the shop’. See Table 1 for an overview of the

dependent variables that were measured by multiple items.

5.5. Analysis

All questionnaires were done digitally and could therefore be easily exported to the

data analysis program SPSS. Where necessary, items were computed to form a

single item. Depending on the dependent variables’ measuring level (interval or

nominal), a one-way variance analysis was undertaken or the Chi-squared was

calculated. With the ANOVA, the Tukey post-hoc was calculated to gain insight

into where a possible significant difference was to be found. By means of a

Article No~e00336





regression analysis, the level was studied of the extent enjoyment and novelty

played a mediating role in the found relationships.

Except for open-recall, no variables had to be re-coded. The answer to the open-

recall question was only used if the correct answer was given. Answers that gave

both the correct and incorrect answer were calculated as false, in order to minimise

the influence of guesses. To be able to compare the number of correct open-recall

answers between the conditions, the answers for these variables were indeed re-

coded. Every wrong answer was coded as 0 and every right answer as 1.

6. Results

6.1. Experience physical shop

From the first experiment, the three conditions appear to differ significantly from

each other. F (2, 150) = 34.31, p = 0.000. The post hoc Tukey test showed that test

subjects who saw the regular photo on the website had significantly less the feeling

that they experienced the physical shop (M = 3,28, SD = 1,39) than test subjects

who saw the 360-degree photo (M = 4.21, SD = 1.43). p = 0.003. Test subjects

who received instructions from the website to view the shop in virtual reality had a

even stronger feeling that they had experienced the physical store (M = 5.57, SD =

1.45) than test subjects from the 360-degree condition. p = 0.000.

The second experiment also showed that test subjects who has seen the 360-degree

photo on the website had significantly less the feeling that they had experienced the

physical shop (M = 4.00 SD = 1.44) than test subjects who saw the store in virtual

reality (M = 4.98, SD = 1.28). A significant result at 5%: F (1, 105) = 13.88, p =

0.000.

6.2. Holistic shop experience

Experiment 1: In the VR condition, the holistic shop experience was experienced

more strongly by approximately two points (M = 5.26, SD = 0.95), than in the

photo condition (M = 3.13, SD = 1.29) and in the 360-degree condition (M = 3.49,

SD = 1.02). F (2, 150) = 53.54, p = 0.000.

Experiment 2: In the VR condition, the holistic shop experience was experienced

more strongly by almost one-and-a-half points (M = 4.52, SD = 0.91) relative to

the 360-degree condition (M = 3.16, SD = 1.00). Also a significant result at 5%: F

(1, 104) = 53.78, p = 0.000.

6.3. Purchase intention

Experiment 1: For purchase intention, only one significant difference was found

between the 360-degree condition and the VR condition. Test subjects from the VR

Article No~e00336





Table 1. Measurements of dependent variables*.

Variable Items Varianceexp1/exp2

Cronbach’s alphaexp1/exp2

Holistic shop ex-perience

‘During my online visit to America Today I felt immersed in the shop’; ‘During my online visit to America Today I felt connected to theshop’; ‘This online visit was memorable’; and ‘I experienced the atmosphere that America Today reflects online as pleasant’

71.04%/64.2% 0.86/0.81

Visitor intention ‘The likelihood that I would visit America Today’s physical store is . . . ’ and ‘The likelihood that I would recommend America Today’sphysical store to friends and/or family is . . . ’

86.61%/84.70%

0.85/0.82

Novelty unique-ordinary; innovative-average; unusual-usual n.a./72.76% n.a./0.81

*Note: only the dependent variables that consist out of multiple items are shown in this Table.

Article

No~e00336

17http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00336

2405-8440/©2017

Publishedby

Elsevier

Ltd.

This

isan

openaccess

articleunder

theCC

BY-N

C-N

Dlicense



condition scored over a point higher for purchase intention (M = 3.78, SD = 1.40)

than test subjects from the 360-degree condition (M = 2.73, SD = 1.48). F (2, 150)

= 5.92, p = 0.002. The purchase intention of test subjects from the photo condition

did not differ significantly from the other two conditions (M = 3.20, SD = 1,68).

Experiment 2: Test subjects from the VR condition had a significantly stronger

purchase intention (M = 4,00, SD = 1,45) than test subjects from the 360-degree

condition (M = 3.35, SD = 1.31). This result was significant at 5% F (1, 105) =

5.95, p = 0.016.

6.4. Visitor intention

Experiment 1: Test subjects from the VR condition have a higher intention to visit

the physical store (M = 4.33, SD = 1.32) than test subjects from the photo

condition (M = 3.24, SD = 1.58) and the 360-degree condition (M = 3.19, SD =

1.41). F (2, 150) = 10.20, p = 0.000. The visitor intention with test subjects who

were exposed to the VR condition was over a point higher than with test subjects

from the other two conditions.

Experiment 2: Test subjects in the VR condition have a higher visitor intention (M

= 4.17, SD = 1.16) than test subjects from the 360-degree condition (M = 3.63, SD

= 1.09). F (1, 105) = 10.20, p = 0.015.

6.5. Grade

Test subjects were asked what grade they would give their online visit. The answer

could range from 1 (= very bad) to 10 (= very good). While the photo condition

(M = 5.31, SD = 1.91) and the 360-degree condition (M = 5.73, SD = 1.57) scored

mediocre to adequate, the VR condition with its average of 7.55 (SD = 0.94)

scored significantly higher, namely above-average to good F (2, 150) = 30.90, p =

0.000.

These findings matched the results of experiment 2. Test subjects who saw the

shop via a 360-degree photo graded their online visit with a 5.65 on a scale of 1 to

10–barely a pass. Test subjects who saw the shop via virtual reality gave their

online visit a 7.02–an easy pass. This last group valued their online visit

significantly more. F (1, 105) = 34.20, p = 0.000.

6.6. Opinion of physical shop America Today

Except for five, all test subjects knew of the brand and shop America Today before

taking part in the research. This was the case in both experiment 1 and 2. From the

first experiment, the opinion of test subjects about America Today became more

positive with those from the VR condition (n = 24 = 15,6%) than with test subjects

from the photo (n = 8 = 5.2%) or 360-degree condition (n = 5 = 3.9%). Chi-square

Article No~e00336





= 22.71, p = 0.000. Only one test subject, who was in the 360-degree condition,

said his or her opinion changed to the negative.

The second experiment also showed that the opinion about America Today became

more often more positive with test subjects from the VR condition (n = 18 =

18.36%) than with test subjects from the 360-degree condition (n = 3 = 3,06%).

Chi-square = 16.52, p = 0.000. With five test subjects the opinion became more

negative, and all of these were from the 360-degree condition.

6.7. Recall

Experiment 1: From the first open-recall question, 15 test subjects from the photo

condition answered question 1 correctly; with the aided-recall, 21 answered the

question correctly. In the 360-degree condition, 12 test subjects had the correct

answer for open-recall, and 18 had the correct answer for aided-recall. In the VR

condition, the right answer was given by 12 test subjects for the open question, and

by 21 test subjects for the multiple-choice question.

With the photo condition, 16 test subjects answered the open-recall question

correctly; with aided-recall, the number was 23. In the 360-degree condition, 12

test subjects answered correctly in the open format and 20 answered correctly with

the multiple-choice. With the test subjects from the VR condition, 12 got the open

question correct, and 21 got the multiple-choice question correct.

Finally, 12 test subjects answered the third open-recall question in the photo

condition correctly; with the aided-recall, 20 answered correctly. In the 360-degree

condition, the numbers were 6 and 17, respectively. With the VR condition, 6 and

15, respectively.

It appears that the condition has no influence on open-recall; the Chi-square was

not significant for any of the three questions (question 1: Chi-square = 0.277, p =

0.871; question 2: Chi-square = 1.016, p = 0.602; question 3: Chi-square = 4.737,

p = 0.315). Also with aided-recall, no significant effect was found (question 1:

Chi-square = 3.695, p = 0.884; question 2: Chi-square = 8.121, p = 0.422;

question 3: Chi-square = 4.225, p = 0.836).

Experiment 2: In the 360-degree condition, 15 test subjects had the right answer for

open-recall, 18 for aided-recall. In VR condition, 15 test subjects had the right

answer for the open question, 26 for the multiple-choice.

Open-recall question 2 was answered correctly by 12 test subjects in the 360-

degree condition, while 20 answered the multiple-choice question correctly. Of the

test subjects from the VR condition, 11 got the open question correct and 24 got the

multiple-choice question correct.

Article No~e00336





Finally, the third open-recall question in the 360-degree condition was answered

correctly by 15 test subjects, for aided-recall this was 21. In the 360-degree

condition these numbers were respectively 19 and 17. And with the VR condition,

these numbers were 6 and 27.

It appears that the condition has no influence on open-recall; the Chi-square was

not significant for any of the three questions (question 1: Chi-square = 0.033, p =

0.513; question 2: Chi-square = 0.150, p = 0.349; question 3: Chi-square = 0.400,

p = 0.336). Also with aided-recall, no significant effect was found (question 1:

Chi-square = 1.784, p = 0.612; question 2: Chi-square = 1.784, p = 0.775;

question 3: Chi-square = 2.303, p = 0.680).

6.8. Mediators

6.8.1. Enjoyment

The first experiment shows that test subjects from the photo condition (M = 3.20,

SD = 1.61) and the 360-degree condition (M = 3.51, SD = 1.50) found the online

visit almost twice less enjoyable than the test subjects from the VR condition (M =

6.12, 1.08). F (2, 150) = 64.70, p = 0.000. Also in experiment 2, the test subjects

from the VR condition found their online visit more enjoyable (M = 5.35, SD =

1.09) than subjects from the 360-degree condition (M = 3.50, SD = 1.48). F (1,

105) = 54.48, p = 0.000. Both experiments also show that enjoyment is a mediator

in the relationship between condition and:

1. Experience of physical shop. Experiment 1: t (0.17, 0.46) = 4.27, p = 0.000. The

model correlates mediocrely with ‘experience physical shop’ (R = 0.618) and

explains 38.2% of the experience of the physical shop. Experiment 2: t (0.19,

0.55) = 4.06, p = 0.000.

2. Holistic shop experience. Experiment 1: t (0.40, 0.59) = 10.25, p = 0.000. The

model correlates strongly with the holistic shop experience (R = 0.796) and

explains 63.3% of the holistic shop experience. Experiment 2: t (0.35, 0.56) =

8.49, p = 0.000. The model correlates strongly with the ‘hedonistic shop

experience’ (R = 0.777), explaining 60.3% of the hedonistic shop experience.

3. Purchase intention. Experiment 1: t (0.22, 0.53) = 4.79, p = 0.000. The model

correlates poorly with purchase intention (R = 0.39), predicting 15.5% of the

purchase intention. Experiment 2: t (0.19, 0.56) = 4.015, p = 0.000. Explaining

only 17.7%, the model correlates poorly with purchase intention (R = 0.421).

4. Visitor intention. Experiment 1: t (0.30, 0.58) = 6.17, p = 0.000. The model

correlates mediocrely with visitor intention (R = 0.519), explaining 27%.

Experiment 2: t (0.16, 0.46) = 4.06, p = 0.000. The model correlates weakly

with visitor intention (R = 0.417), explaining it for 17.4%.

Article No~e00336





5. Grade. Experiment 1: t (0.45, 0.73) = 8.28, p = 0.000. The model correlates

strongly with ‘grade’ (R = 0.700), explaining 49% of the grade. Experiment 2: t

(0.26, 0.57) = 5.31, p = 0.000. The model correlates mediocrely with the grade

(R = 0.620), explaining 38.5% of the grade given by the test subjects for their

online visit.

6.8.2. Novelty

The second experiment showed that modality also has an effect on novelty. Test

subjects from the VR condition found their online visit to be more innovative (M =

3.47, SD = 1.27) than test subjects from the 360-degree condition (M = 2.63, SD =

1.10). F (1, 105) = 12.98, p = 0.000. Novelty also appeared as a mediator in the

relationship between condition and:

1. Experience physical shop: t (-0.64, −0.26) = -4.67, p = 0.000. The model

correlates mediocrely with the experience of physical shop (R = 0.510) and

explains 26% of the feeling that the physical shop has been experienced.

2. Holistic shop experience: t (-0.44, −16) = -4.338, p = 0.000. The model

correlates mediocrely with ‘hedonistic shop experience’ (R = 0.661) and

explains the hedonistic shop experience for 43.7%.

3. Purchase intention: t (-0.49, −0.07) = -2.69, p = 0.008. The model correlates

poorly with purchase intention (R = 0,338), explaining it for 11.4%.

4. Visitor intention: t (-0.36, −0.03) = -2.271, p = 0.025. The model correlates

poorly with visitor intention (R = 0.304), explaining it for 9.2%.

5. Grade: t (-0.51, −0.16) = -3.78, p = 0.000. The model correlates mediocrely

with the grade (R = 0,561) and explains the grade that the test subjects gave

their online visit for 31.5%.

Except for recall, all dependent variables were found to have significant effects. In

addition, enjoyment and novelty were shown to play mediating roles. Table 2 gives

an overview of all results from both experiments.

6.9. Use

After evaluating the first experiment, it was decided for the second experiment to

also ask about usage on a scale from 1 (highly unlikely) to 7 (highly likely). The

results showed that only 7.3% of test subjects who used the Cardboard for this

research (n = 55) gave it a score of 5 or higher. In other words, only 7.3% would

likely buy a Cardboard for ten euros to virtually view the shop. The other 92.7%

was neutral or expressed that they would not spend 10 euros to buy a Cardboard for

this reason.

Article No~e00336





However, more test subjects would be willing to download an app to virtually view

the store if they received a Cardboard for free: 47.2% gave a 5 or higher and

thereby expressing their likelihood of downloading and using an app. Roughly the

same percentage (44.5%) said they would visit YouTube to virtually view the shop,

as long as they received the Cardboard for free.

See Fig. 3 for a conceptual framework of the results.

7. Discussion and conclusions

This study’s central research question was: To what extent can a shopping

experience be created by means of online material (regular photo of the store, 360-

degree photo or virtual reality photo), and to what extent do these different

materials create different effects? Within this question, nine hypothesises were

formulated.

Hypothesis 1 (The virtual reality photo will increase the feeling of having

experienced the physical store to a larger extent compared to the 360-degree photo,

which, in turn will increase this feeling to a larger extent than the photo) is

accepted. It appears that the modalities show a cascading effect. A regular photo

leads to the least amount of feeling that you have experienced the store, the VR

Table 2. Scores per experiment − direct effects of photo type (VR, 360, photo) on

the dependent variables.

Dependent variables: Experiment 1 Experiment 2

Photo 360 VR 360 VR

Experience physical shop 3.28a 4.21b 5.57c 4.00a 4.98b

Holistic shop experience 3.13a 3.49a 5.26b 3.16a 4.52b

Purchase intention 3.20ab 2.73a 3.78b 3.35a 4.00b

Visitor intention 3.24a 3.19a 4.33b 3.63a 4.17b

Grade for online visit 5.31a 5.73a 7.55b 5.65a 7.02b

Opinion on America Today 5.2%a 3.9%a 15.6%b 3.06%a 18.36%b

Open-recall 43a 30a 30a 42a 45a

Aided-recall 64a 55a 57a 59a 77a

Enjoyment 3.20a 3.51a 6.12b 3.50a 5.35b

Novelty - - - 2.63a 3.47b

- Significant differences (p < 0.05) are only shown per experiment with abc.

- All variables are measured on a seven-point scale, except for grade (= ten-point scale), opinion (=

percentage by which opinion is positively changed) and recall (= absolute total number of how many

test subjects gave the correct answer for the three questions).

- Presented numbers are average scores except for opinion and recall.

- Novelty is only covered in the second experiment.

Article No~e00336





photo the most, and the 360-degree photo lies in the middle. Between the effects of

each modality is approximately 1 full point (measured on a seven-point scale).

These differences are significant. It can be concluded that the findings around this

dependent variable is valid: the richer the medium put online to show the physical

store, the stronger the feeling with the consumer that he/she has experienced the

physical store.

Hypothesis 2 (The virtual reality photo will elicit a more positive experience

compared to the 360-degree photo, which in turn will elicit a more positive

experience than the regular photo) is partly accepted. Those test subjects who saw

the VR photo of the clothing shop rated their holistic shop experience more

positively by about two points (on a seven-point scale) than test subjects who saw a

regular or a 360-degree photo of the shop. No differing effects were found between

the photo and the 360-degree photo.

The third hypothesis (The virtual reality photo will elicit a higher purchase

intention compared to the 360-degree photo, which in turn will elicit a higher

purchase intention than the regular photo) is also largely accepted. With the effect

on purchase intention, it appears that there is only a significant difference between

test subjects who saw the VR photo and test subjects who saw the 360-degree

[(Fig._3)TD$FIG]

Fig. 3. Conceptual framework results.

Article No~e00336





photo. Test subjects from the VR condition scored an ample half-point higher with

purchase intention than test subjects from the 360-degree condition.

Hypothesis four (The virtual reality photo will elicit a higher visitor intention to the

physical store compared to the 360-degree photo, which in turn will elicit a higher

visitor intention than the regular photo) is partly accepted, since the visitor

intention with test subjects exposed to the VR condition score an ample point

higher than test subjects from the other two conditions. This difference is

significant. No differences were found between the other two conditions.

The fifth hypothesis (Consumers that see the virtual reality photo will grade their

online visit higher than consumers that see the 360-degree photo and the regular

photo) is accepted completely. On basis of this research, it can be concluded that

when test subjects are given instructions via a fashion retail shop to use a Google

Cardboard to virtually view the fashion shop, they will give a significantly higher

grade to the online visit than when they see the same shop with a regular photo or a

360-degree photo. The grade given by test subjects who saw the shop virtually is

approximately two points greater. On a ten-point scale this is the difference

between mediocre/adequate and above-adequate/good.

Hypothesis 6 (The virtual reality photo will lead to more positively changed

opinions about the presented store than the 360-degree photo or the regular photo

will) is also accepted. The opinions of test subjects, who were already familiar with

America Today, was three more times likely to change positively when they were

exposed to the VR condition than with the photo condition. In comparison to the

360-degree condition, this positive change of opinion was even five times more

likely. These differences are significant.

Hypothesis 7 (The virtual reality photo will lead to a better recall concerning the

presented store than with the 360-degree photo and the regular photo) is rejected.

Both with open-recall and aided-recall, no effect was found across the conditions.

Finally, hypotheses 8 and 9 explored the level that the found effects could be

explained by the variables enjoyment and novelty. With both variables, the

relationship between condition and ‘experience physical shop’, ‘holistic shop

experience’, ‘grade’, ‘visitor intention’ and ‘purchase intention’ could be partly

explained.

With all variables, with the exception of recall, an effect in modality was found in

both experiments. With the effect on purchase intention, the only difference was

found between the VR condition and the 360-degree condition. The effect on the

level in which test subjects felt that they had experienced the physical shop, differs

significantly per condition. With the other variables, a difference was always found

between the effect of the VR photo and the other two photos, but not between the

Article No~e00336





regular photo and the 360-degree photo. The effect of the VR photo was more

positive with every found difference.

It can therefore be concluded on basis of this research that a VR photo of a fashion

shop can have a more positive influence on test subjects aged between 16 and 41

and who study at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, than a regular

photo or a 360-degree photo of the same fashion shop. Hence, it’s likely a good

idea for a (r) etailer to present their shop virtually. Especially shops that are similar

like the America Today shop; shops that are selling sporty ‘college’ apparel formen and women. For other types of fashion shops VR could be an outcome as well,

but more research is needed to make a statement about that. An important caveat:

most consumers made clear that they do not want to buy their own Cardboard.

Hence, the retailer would have to distribute these for free in order to reach the

desired positive effects. Half of the consumers did say they were willing to

download a VR-app if equipped with a free Cardboard. In addition, retailers should

move fast to make use of VR since the found effects could weaken once the

novelty of VR wears off.

Experiment 1 did not factor in the potential consumer threshold related to all the

efforts behind having a Cardboard prepared for use. The effect of the modalities

was central to this study and that’s where the focus remained. This meant that the

Google Cardboard and the smartphone with installed app were already waiting for

the test subjects who were to be exposed to the VR condition. It remains the

question whether the found positive effects would be maintained if the consumer

has to buy their own Cardboard, download the app, start the app and the slide the

smartphone in the Cardboard − much less, if the consumer would be willing to take

all these steps. Experiment 2 tried to factor in these questions by asking the test

subjects on the likelihood that they themselves would buy and use a Cardboard

and/or app. Almost half of the test subjects said they would likely download the

app or visit YouTube to virtually view the shop − as long as they got the

Cardboard for free. Therefore, the free distribution of Cardboards by retailers may

be a worthwhile investment. However, it’s recommended that any follow-up

research also still involves interviewing consumers about the likelihood of them

taking all these steps. At the same time, such research could look more deeply at

why the effects of VR were so positive. In addition, a third experiment could be

undertaken to research the level that the found effects were maintained when the

consumers had to make the preparations themselves to virtually view the store. At

last, for the purpose of these experiments, we explicitly asked the participants to

attend to the stimuli. To overcome effects of this unnatural situation, it would be

wise to set up a similar experiment in a more natural situation.

One important discussion point around the first experiment’s methodology is

related to how, due to practical reasons, not all test subjects could be randomly

Article No~e00336





assigned one of the three conditions. While a number of variables were controlled

on whether they were divided equally over the conditions, it is not certain that

other characteristics and features of the test subjects were equally divided.

Nevertheless, experiment 2, where all test subjects were randomly divided over the

two conditions, confirmed the results from experiment 1.

Finally, we would also recommend that any further research should replace, or

expand on, the question concerning the grade that test subjects gave to the online

visit. In this research it was not clear whether the given rating was based on

satisfaction, appreciation or something completely different.

While much research is still required within fashion retail to establish all the effects

of the different online modalities on the dependent variables studied here, the

results of this research do make a strong initial statement on the positive effects of

VR for retailers. Namely: presenting an offline shop experience on an online

platform is done more successfully with the help of VR than with a regular or 360-

degree photo. In addition, using VR seems very suitable for achieving other

positive effects, such as increasing the consumer’s visitor intention for the physical

shop. In a society where online shopping is increasing and the physical shop is

under pressure, the use of VR seems like a logical step.

Declarations

Author contribution statement

Anne Moes: Conceived and designed the experiments; Performed the experiments;

Analyzed and interpreted the data; Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools

or data; Wrote the paper.

Harry van Vliet: Conceived and designed the experiments; Contributed reagents,

materials, analysis tools or data; Wrote the paper.

Funding statement

This work was supported by Amsterdam Creative Industries Network; Fashion

Technology Lab; and the Store Innovation Lab of the programme Entrepreneur-

ship.

Competing interest statement

The authors declare the following conflict of interests: Three organizations made it

financially possible to preform this study, namely: Amsterdam Creative Industries

Network; Fashion Technology Lab; and the Store Innovation Lab of the program

Entrepreneurship.They funded the researchers' hours that were used to perform this

study and to write the paper.

Article No~e00336





Additional information

Supplementary content related to this article has been published online at http://dx.

doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00336.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jochen Riester and the VR-Atelier for all their help. Also

we want to thank Steve Korver, who translated this article to English.

References

Allard, T., Babin, B., Chebat, J.C., 2009. When income matters: Customers

evaluation of shopping malls’ hedonic and utilitarian orientations. Journal of

Retailing and Consumer Services 16 (1), 40–49.

Bagdare, S., Jain, R., 2013. Measuring retail customer experience. International

Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 41 (10), 790–804.

Bakker, A., 2014. Tips voor het inrichten van de winkelpagina’s in je webshop.

Retrieved on 16 December 2015 http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/25-tips-

voor-het-inrichten-van-de-winkelpaginas-in-je-webshop.

Bodhani, A., 2012. Shops offer the e-tail experience. Eng. Technol. 7 (5), 46–49.

Bronner, F., Neijens, P., 2006. Audience experiences of media context and

embedded advertising. The Market Research Society 48 (1), 81–100.

Cronin, J.J., Brady, M.K., Hult, T.M., 2000. Assessing the effects of quality, value,

and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environ-

ments. J. Retailing 76 (2), 192–218.

Daft, R.L., Lengel, R.H., 1984. Information richness: A new approach to

managerial behavior and organization design. In: STAW, B.M., CUMMINGS, L.

L. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior. JAI Press, Greenwich.

DigitasLBI, 2014. Nederlandse consument verwacht veel, maar koopt nog relatief

weinig via smartphone. Retrieved on 17 December 2015 http://www.digitaslbi.

com/nl/nieuws/nederlands/nederlandse-consument-verwacht-veel-maar-koopt-

nog-relatief-weinig-via-smartphone/.

Fashionretailfuture, 2014. Hema app: scan in-store. Retrieved on 23 August 2016

http://fashionretailfuture.com/hema-app-scan-in-store/.

Flavian, C., Guinalui, M., Gurrea, R., 2006. The role played by perceived usability,

satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Inform. Manage. 43 (1), 1–14.

Article No~e00336






http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2405-8440(17)30106-8/sbref0005





http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/25-tips-voor-het-inrichten-van-de-winkelpaginas-in-je-webshop

http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/25-tips-voor-het-inrichten-van-de-winkelpaginas-in-je-webshop










http://www.digitaslbi.com/nl/nieuws/nederlands/nederlandse-consument-verwacht-veel-maar-koopt-nog-relatief-weinig-via-smartphone/



http://fashionretailfuture.com/hema-app-scan-in-store/




Google, 2017. Google Street View. Retrieved on 21 December 2015 https://www.

google.com/maps/streetview/trusted/.

Hol, H., 2016. 6 dingen die je moet weten over virtual reality. Retrieved on 12

September 2015 https://www.kennisnet.nl/artikel/6-dingen-die-je-moet-weten-

over-virtual-reality/.

Kim, J., Fiore, A.M., Lee, H., 2007. Influences of online store perception, shopping

enjoyment, and shopping involvement on consumer patronage behavior towards on

online retailer. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 14 (2), 95–107.

Kim, S.Y., Lim, Y.J., 2010. Consumers' perceived importance of and satisfaction

with internet shopping. Electron. Mark. 11 (3), 148–154.

Kloet, S., 2012. In 4 stappen naar een omnichannel strategie. Retrieved on 21

December 2015 http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2012/12/20/in-4-stappen-

naar-een-omnichannelstrategie/.

Lu, K., 2014. Sense-sational! New tablets let you feel texture on images. Retrieved

on 18 December 2015 http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/03/05/haptic-touchsc-

reen-texture-fujitsu-5-things-future.

Mcelrath, Y.T., 2005. The effect of antismoking advertisement executional

characteristics on youth comprehension, appraisal, recall, and engagement. J.

Health Commun. 10, 127–143.

Moes, A., Van Vliet, H., 2015. Het effect van beacons in de byAMFI Store

gemeten, geanalyseerd en ontmaskerd. Retrieved on 21 December 2015 http://

www.marketingtribune.nl/food-en-retail/nieuws/2015/04/het-effect-van-beacons-

in-de-byamfi-store/index.xml.

Multiscope, 2016. Marktonderzoek VR-brillen. Retrieved on 12 September 2016

http://www.multiscope.nl/persberichten/consument-heeft-hoge-verwachting-van-

vr-brillen.html.

Newell, S.J., Henderson, K.V., 1998. Super Bowl advertising: Field testing the

importance of advertisement frequency, length and placement on recall. Journal of

Marketing Communications 4.

Nu.nl, 2015. experience-breda.htmlVerandering parkeertarieven draagt bij aan

shop experience Breda, . Retrieved on 21 December 2015 http://www.nu.nl/breda/

4030217/verandering-parkeertarieven-draagt-bij-shop.

Petermans, A., Janssens, W., Van Cleempoel, K., 2013. A holistic framework for

conceptualizing customer experiences in retail environments. J. Des. 7 (2), 1–18.

Article No~e00336




https://www.google.com/maps/streetview/trusted/

https://www.google.com/maps/streetview/trusted/

https://www.kennisnet.nl/artikel/6-dingen-die-je-moet-weten-over-virtual-reality/

https://www.kennisnet.nl/artikel/6-dingen-die-je-moet-weten-over-virtual-reality/






http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2012/12/20/in-4-stappen-naar-een-omnichannelstrategie/

http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2012/12/20/in-4-stappen-naar-een-omnichannelstrategie/

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/03/05/haptic-touchscreen-texture-fujitsu-5-things-future

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/03/05/haptic-touchscreen-texture-fujitsu-5-things-future




http://www.marketingtribune.nl/food-en-retail/nieuws/2015/04/het-effect-van-beacons-in-de-byamfi-store/index.xml



http://www.multiscope.nl/persberichten/consument-heeft-hoge-verwachting-van-vr-brillen.html

http://www.multiscope.nl/persberichten/consument-heeft-hoge-verwachting-van-vr-brillen.html




http://www.nu.nl/breda/4030217/verandering-parkeertarieven-draagt-bij-shop

http://www.nu.nl/breda/4030217/verandering-parkeertarieven-draagt-bij-shop




Retaildetail, 2014. Cor Molenaar: “Binnenstad moet nieuwe kansen krijgen”..Retrieved on 21 December 2015 http://www.retaildetail.nl/case-van-de-week/item/

15681-cor-molenaar-binnenstad-moet-nieuwe-kansen-krijgen.

Retailnews, 2013. Consument vindt shop experience ondermaats. Retrieved on 21

December 2015 http://www.retailnews.nl/nieuws/JTY7T4T7EeOSgiIACiAWJg-0/

consument-vindt-shopexperience-ondermaats.html.

Riester, J., Van Vliet, H., 2015. Eerste virtuele winkeltour ter wereld met Google

cardboard. Retrieved on 21 December 2015 http://www.amsterdamcreativeindus-

tries.com/news/eerste-virtuele-winkeltour-ter-wereld-met-google-cardboard.

Schmidt-Subramanian, M., 2013. Seven steps to successful customer experience

measurements programs. Forrester Research.

Shopper Marketing, 2014. Retailers groeien toe naar shop experience 2.0.

Retrieved on 21 December 2015 http://shoppermarketingupdate.nl/retailers-

groeien-toe-naar-shopexperience-2-0/.

Store of the Future, 2016. Online goes offline. Whitepaper. retrieved on 5

September 2016 http://www.hva.nl/createit/lectoraten/lectoraten/lectoraten/con-

tent/folder/lectoraat-crossmedia/publicaties?tools/item/online-goes-offline.html.

Suh, K., Lee, Y., 2015. The Effects of Virtual Reality on Consumer Learning: An

Empirical Investigation. Mis Quarterly 29 (4), 673–697.

TNS, 2013. Showrooming met smartphone: ramp & redding voor retailersMobile

Life, . Retrieved on 5 September 2016 http://www.tns-nipo.com/nieuws/nieuws-

berichten/showrooming-met-smartphone-ramp-redding-voor-ret/.

Van Vliet, H., Hekman, E., Veldhoen, N., Rotte, M., Brussee, R., 2012. Enhancing

user involvement with digital cultural heritage: the use of social tagging and

storytelling. First Monday 14 (5).

Van Vliet, H., 2014. Cross-mediascapes. Amsterdam University Press, Amster-

dam.

Van Vliet, H., Moes, A., Schrandt, B., 2015. The fashion retailscape: innovations

in shopping. Amsterdam Creative Industries Publishing, Amsterdam.

Venkatesh, V., 1999. Creation of favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of

intrinsic motivation. Mis Quarterly 23 (2), 239–260.

Verhagen, T., 2016. De virtuele spiegel als oplossing voor online en offline

winkelen. Emerce. Retrieved on 7 November 2016 http://www.emerce.nl/

achtergrond/virtuele-spiegel-als-oplossing-online-en-offline-winkelen.

Article No~e00336




http://www.retaildetail.nl/case-van-de-week/item/15681-cor-molenaar-binnenstad-moet-nieuwe-kansen-krijgen

http://www.retaildetail.nl/case-van-de-week/item/15681-cor-molenaar-binnenstad-moet-nieuwe-kansen-krijgen

http://www.retailnews.nl/nieuws/JTY7T4T7EeOSgiIACiAWJg-0/consument-vindt-shopexperience-ondermaats.html

http://www.retailnews.nl/nieuws/JTY7T4T7EeOSgiIACiAWJg-0/consument-vindt-shopexperience-ondermaats.html

http://www.amsterdamcreativeindustries.com/news/eerste-virtuele-winkeltour-ter-wereld-met-google-cardboard

http://www.amsterdamcreativeindustries.com/news/eerste-virtuele-winkeltour-ter-wereld-met-google-cardboard



http://shoppermarketingupdate.nl/retailers-groeien-toe-naar-shopexperience-2-0/

http://shoppermarketingupdate.nl/retailers-groeien-toe-naar-shopexperience-2-0/

http://www.hva.nl/createit/lectoraten/lectoraten/lectoraten/content/folder/lectoraat-crossmedia/publicaties?tools/item/online-goes-offline.html

http://www.hva.nl/createit/lectoraten/lectoraten/lectoraten/content/folder/lectoraat-crossmedia/publicaties?tools/item/online-goes-offline.html



http://www.tns-nipo.com/nieuws/nieuwsberichten/showrooming-met-smartphone-ramp-redding-voor-ret/

http://www.tns-nipo.com/nieuws/nieuwsberichten/showrooming-met-smartphone-ramp-redding-voor-ret/










http://www.emerce.nl/achtergrond/virtuele-spiegel-als-oplossing-online-en-offline-winkelen

http://www.emerce.nl/achtergrond/virtuele-spiegel-als-oplossing-online-en-offline-winkelen


Verhagen, T., Vonkeman, C., Fledberg, F., Verhagen, P., 2014. Present it like its

here: creating local presence to improve online product experiences. Comput.

Human Behav. 39, 270–280.

Verhagen, T., Vonkeman, C., van Dolen, W., 2016. Making online products more

tangible: The effect of product presentation formats on product evaluations.

Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 19 (7), 460–464.

Yüksel, A., 2007. Tourist shopping habitat: effects on emotions, shopping value

and behaviours. Tour. Manag. 28 (1), 58–69.

Article No~e00336













the online appeal of the physical shop: how a physical ...show, among other outcomes, that consumers...

Documents